So i'm thinking of applying abroad for masters after graduation but expenses are an issue of course.
I wanted to know how competitive getting the scholarship is and Does the scholarship amount get transferred in time?
Foreseeing the "Dimaraji" Controversy in Cachar.
Until the day before the subreddit dedicated to the Barak Valley was banned, I was actively engaged in discussions and debates regarding issues affecting the region. In those discussions, I often raised concerns about separatist tendencies, certain self-serving political narratives, and what I perceived as negligence toward the history of the Dimasa people and the indigenous communities of the Barak Valley.
In recent years, many members of the Sylheti/Bengali community of the Barak Valley have promoted several narratives across social media and public discourse that I believe deserve critical examination.
One of the most prominent issues was the emergence of separatist tendencies and attempts to incorporate the Dimasa community into such narratives. Without acknowledging the historical roles of the Dimasa Kingdom and the Tripura Kingdom in the region, demands for a separate Barak entity appear historically incomplete, as these indigenous polities were central to the region's political history.
Another issue has been the relative lack of recognition given to the history of the Dimasa Kingdom and other Tibeto-Burman kingdoms and cultures that shaped the historical landscape of the region.
Attempts have also been made to establish a "Bengali-first" historical narrative that contrasts with the broader anthropological consensus regarding the Northeast–Bangladesh sphere, which generally recognises Tibeto-Burman and Austroasiatic populations among the earliest inhabitants of the wider region.
A month ago, during a discussion on r/Assam with several Sylheti/Bengali participants, I raised examples that I considered indicative of a broader lack of awareness regarding the Dimasa community and its historical association with the Barak Valley.
First, whenever Dimasa individuals and organisations proposed renaming the railway station at Silchar as a tribute to the last monarch of the historic Dimasa Kingdom, Gobind Chandra Narayan Hasnu, and the freedom fighter Sambhudhan Phonglo, sections of the Bengali community allegedly responded with protests, opposition, and demonstrations.
Second, the roof design of the railway station at Silchar was originally intended to resemble the famous stone architecture of Maibang and other monuments associated with Dimasa heritage in Cachar. According to concerns raised by some Dimasa groups, later modifications covered this design with tin sheets. When restoration of the original architectural concept was proposed, the response, in their view, was not constructive engagement but further resistance and the growth of anti-Dimasa narratives.
Whenever these concerns were raised, many discussions quickly became defensive rather than historical in nature, making meaningful engagement difficult.
The Controversy
A month later, these tensions became publicly visible following the controversy surrounding the use of the term "Dimaraji" in Assam's Lakhipur subdivision.
The controversy emerged after a welcome arch bearing the inscription:
"Greetings, Nabada Johari, Pailapool, Dima Raji"
was erected during the visit of Assam Cabinet Minister Kaushik Rai. The arch also referenced Nabada Johari.
For many observers, the term "Dimaraji" was interpreted as a political statement. However, within traditional Dimasa usage, the term has a broader historical and social meaning.
Etymologically, "Dimaraji" is derived from two words: Dima and Raji, the latter being derived from the Sanskrit-derived word Rajya. Historically, the term referred to a socio-administrative unit, village, township, or territory within Dimasa society. It denoted jurisdiction, community, or settlement rather than necessarily implying a modern political project.
In contemporary Dimasa usage, Raji is often synonymous with Nohlai, meaning "village." Therefore, historically speaking, Dimaraji referred primarily to a Dimasa settlement or socio-administrative community rather than an inherently political concept.
Only in more recent decades did the term become associated with demands for autonomous statehood under the provisions of the Sixth Schedule following movements led by certain Dimasa organisations.
From this perspective, the controversy surrounding the welcome arch was less about the word itself and more about how the term was interpreted by different communities.
Had there been greater understanding of the historical context of the term, greater recognition of Dimasa historical associations with the Barak Valley, and more willingness to engage with indigenous perspectives, the controversy may not have escalated to the extent that it did.
Regardless of contemporary political debates, it remains a historical fact that much of present-day Cachar was once part of the Dimasa Kingdom. Consequently, many Dimasa people believe they possess legitimate historical grounds to advocate for greater autonomy or statehood.
The etymology of the term itself also invites reflection.
If the use of "Dimaraji" is considered controversial because of its linguistic origins, then similar scrutiny could equally be applied to the name "Cachar."
The term "Cachar" itself derives from "Kachari," an exonym historically used by neighbouring peoples and outsiders to refer to groups belonging to the wider Baric family. Over time, the term became closely associated with the Dimasa, and it is through this historical process that the region eventually acquired the name "Cachar."
The Dimasa imprint is therefore embedded within the historical and linguistic identity of Cachar itself. Focusing exclusively on the term "Dimaraji" while ignoring this broader historical context presents only a partial understanding of the region's past.
Following the controversy, another long-standing issue resurfaced — namely the covering of the architectural replica of Dimasa monuments at the Silchar railway station with tin sheets, a matter that many Dimasa individuals continue to regard as symbolic of the wider neglect of Dimasa heritage in the Barak Valley.
Posting this on behalf of the original OP u/sibrai-369
Foreseeing the "Dimaraji" Controversy in Cachar : r/Angkachari
Foreseeing the "Dimaraji" Controversy in Cachar.
Until the day before the subreddit dedicated to the Barak Valley was banned, I was actively engaged in discussions and debates regarding issues affecting the region. In those discussions, I often raised concerns about separatist tendencies, certain self-serving political narratives, and what I perceived as negligence toward the history of the Dimasa people and the indigenous communities of the Barak Valley.
In recent years, many members of the Sylheti/Bengali community of the Barak Valley have promoted several narratives across social media and public discourse that I believe deserve critical examination.
One of the most prominent issues was the emergence of separatist tendencies and attempts to incorporate the Dimasa community into such narratives. Without acknowledging the historical roles of the Dimasa Kingdom and the Tripura Kingdom in the region, demands for a separate Barak entity appear historically incomplete, as these indigenous polities were central to the region's political history.
Another issue has been the relative lack of recognition given to the history of the Dimasa Kingdom and other Tibeto-Burman kingdoms and cultures that shaped the historical landscape of the region.
Attempts have also been made to establish a "Bengali-first" historical narrative that contrasts with the broader anthropological consensus regarding the Northeast–Bangladesh sphere, which generally recognises Tibeto-Burman and Austroasiatic populations among the earliest inhabitants of the wider region.
A month ago, during a discussion on r/Assam with several Sylheti/Bengali participants, I raised examples that I considered indicative of a broader lack of awareness regarding the Dimasa community and its historical association with the Barak Valley.
First, whenever Dimasa individuals and organisations proposed renaming the railway station at Silchar as a tribute to the last monarch of the historic Dimasa Kingdom, Gobind Chandra Narayan Hasnu, and the freedom fighter Sambhudhan Phonglo, sections of the Bengali community allegedly responded with protests, opposition, and demonstrations.
Second, the roof design of the railway station at Silchar was originally intended to resemble the famous stone architecture of Maibang and other monuments associated with Dimasa heritage in Cachar. According to concerns raised by some Dimasa groups, later modifications covered this design with tin sheets. When restoration of the original architectural concept was proposed, the response, in their view, was not constructive engagement but further resistance and the growth of anti-Dimasa narratives.
Whenever these concerns were raised, many discussions quickly became defensive rather than historical in nature, making meaningful engagement difficult.
The Controversy
A month later, these tensions became publicly visible following the controversy surrounding the use of the term "Dimaraji" in Assam's Lakhipur subdivision.
The controversy emerged after a welcome arch bearing the inscription:
"Greetings, Nabada Johari, Pailapool, Dima Raji"
was erected during the visit of Assam Cabinet Minister Kaushik Rai. The arch also referenced Nabada Johari.
For many observers, the term "Dimaraji" was interpreted as a political statement. However, within traditional Dimasa usage, the term has a broader historical and social meaning.
Etymologically, "Dimaraji" is derived from two words: Dima and Raji, the latter being derived from the Sanskrit-derived word Rajya. Historically, the term referred to a socio-administrative unit, village, township, or territory within Dimasa society. It denoted jurisdiction, community, or settlement rather than necessarily implying a modern political project.
In contemporary Dimasa usage, Raji is often synonymous with Nohlai, meaning "village." Therefore, historically speaking, Dimaraji referred primarily to a Dimasa settlement or socio-administrative community rather than an inherently political concept.
Only in more recent decades did the term become associated with demands for autonomous statehood under the provisions of the Sixth Schedule following movements led by certain Dimasa organisations.
From this perspective, the controversy surrounding the welcome arch was less about the word itself and more about how the term was interpreted by different communities.
Had there been greater understanding of the historical context of the term, greater recognition of Dimasa historical associations with the Barak Valley, and more willingness to engage with indigenous perspectives, the controversy may not have escalated to the extent that it did.
Regardless of contemporary political debates, it remains a historical fact that much of present-day Cachar was once part of the Dimasa Kingdom. Consequently, many Dimasa people believe they possess legitimate historical grounds to advocate for greater autonomy or statehood.
The etymology of the term itself also invites reflection.
If the use of "Dimaraji" is considered controversial because of its linguistic origins, then similar scrutiny could equally be applied to the name "Cachar."
The term "Cachar" itself derives from "Kachari," an exonym historically used by neighbouring peoples and outsiders to refer to groups belonging to the wider Baric family. Over time, the term became closely associated with the Dimasa, and it is through this historical process that the region eventually acquired the name "Cachar."
The Dimasa imprint is therefore embedded within the historical and linguistic identity of Cachar itself. Focusing exclusively on the term "Dimaraji" while ignoring this broader historical context presents only a partial understanding of the region's past.
Following the controversy, another long-standing issue resurfaced — namely the covering of the architectural replica of Dimasa monuments at the Silchar railway station with tin sheets, a matter that many Dimasa individuals continue to regard as symbolic of the wider neglect of Dimasa heritage in the Barak Valley.
So i have always scored low throughout my childhood unless i work realllyyy reallly hard and i just really want to change this about me so bad. Please help me out
I think getting our own state is the only shot we have at survival. We cannot let our political and economic fates be tied to the crumbling state called Assam. With the recent news about selling the Rabha Hasong Territorial villages to Adani for a satellite city, it is visible that the elected government has no intention to protect their own Assamese people so let alone us Indigenous people.
Even though our people are of course capable of pulling off their own corrupt antics, having a state will strengthen our identity and rights. We can have more political power and funding.
Hey so I'm a Bodo(a tibeto burman minority in Northeast India) and my hometown is near the border and so its easy for me to go and visit this town, we also often have Bhutanese people coming over for shopping in the local markets and there's a lot of people here and there who are married to or mixed with people of Bhutanese ancestry.
Anyways back to the main point, luckily I can easily pass as a Southern Bhutanese so thought it would be fun to learn the language for some time and spend a week or so in Gelephu next summer all alone; just enough to not bother locals with hindi and english for basic questions like "how much or where this place is".
Hope it doesn't sound that weird 😭Being in my early 20s, I just want a little adventure in my life and this is the only 'daring' thing that my parents will let me do because it's close to home and they know it's a safe town for women. Asked them to let me go to Sikkim or Shillong but they just won't let me.
Noticed that this was only popular among Bodo circles but i want to point out that this is a big deal for the Tribal/Yellow community of Assam as a whole because we are neglected in almost every aspect including media representation; as if we don't exist despite being almost as old as this land(speaking for all Bodo Kachari who still practice their culture and language in here).
I believe that a Tibeto Burman girl representing Assam on a national level is a huge thing when we wouldn't even get a slight mention on the republic day floats lol(not like the other tribal communities did anyway). In the mainstream Media, Tribals/"Yellows" of Assam are brought into light only to use as an argument by "Assamese" people to prove that they are different from bengalis or as some kind of chess board piece(more elaboration on that in the future maybe).
Anyways Here's to hoping that we see a dress representing Bodo culture this time and hope they don't force her to do something disastrous like the last year's miss universe dress(yikes).
And who knows maybe next year it'll be Ahom or Karbi or even Rabha.